coronationstreetfandomcom-20200215-history
Category talk:Murderers
is pat phelan a murderer? (Spice boys (talk) 02:26, November 19, 2016 (UTC) :No. If you're referring to Michael, he died from a heart attack. David (talk) 10:09, November 19, 2016 (UTC) Oh ok (Spice boys (talk) 16:59, November 19, 2016 (UTC) Pat phelan hes a muderer now, so can somebody please add him i don't know how (Spice boys (talk) 02:43, January 21, 2017 (UTC) Steve McDonald Gbjerkec (talk) 02:49, January 29, 2017 (UTC)I'm not sure if he qualifies, but I have had a small (and admittedly embarassing) conversation with the site-administrator about Jim being a murderer, as I did not understand that the requirements for "Murderer" were based on if the victim died immediately at the perpator's hands, and not on how responsible the perpatrator was, I jumped in and didn't take any of these things into account. I want to be more careful this time, so, when looking at the case of Jez Quigley I noticed that, although, Jim was responsible for sending Jez Quigley into the hostpital, and giving him the injuries that resulted in his death, Steve could have been the one to directly kill Jez Quigley. Currently, the pages say that "during a struggle" Jez Quigley's spleen reptured, but most of this struggle happens just beneath the screen, as the camera focuses on Jim and Jez's faces. It might be a long shot, but I think that Steve may have inadvertantly, but directly caused Jez Quigley's spleen to repture, and I would like your opinion on whether or not Steve McDonald should be added to this page.Gbjerkec (talk) 02:49, January 29, 2017 (UTC) :Absolutely not. There was no intent, arrest or conviction.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 09:59, January 29, 2017 (UTC) :Gbjerkec (talk) 03:45, January 30, 2017 (UTC)The same could be said about Kylie Platt, given her unwillingness to accept that Callum was killed. Tony Horrocks, also killed a woman, but was not arrested nor intending to kill.Gbjerkec (talk) 03:45, January 30, 2017 (UTC) ::Sorry, but with over 6000 pages to create on this site and lots more work to do, I'm not debating this. Steve McDonald is not to be given the category of murderer. The matter is now closed.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 09:34, January 30, 2017 (UTC) ::Gbjerkec (talk) 22:52, February 1, 2017 (UTC)I'll have to think you're pulling out like this because you can't back up your claim. I'm not just asking you, anyway. I'm asking everyone who has a second opinion. It also strikes me as arrogant that you believe that being an administrator gives you the right to open and close matters at will. You are not the only administrator on this site, in case you haven't noticed and you do not have power over anyone because of it. If you want me to continue editing, I suggest you change your tone, otherwise I will permanently leave this site effective Febuary 20th.Gbjerkec (talk) 22:52, February 1, 2017 (UTC) :::The episode shows that Jez's spleen ruptures when he reaches over Steve to stop him pressing the alarm. That should lay this matter to rest. David (talk) 02:11, February 10, 2017 (UTC) :::Gbjerkec (talk) 20:16, February 12, 2017 (UTC)Thank-you for supporting your opinion with actual evidence, and not simply "closing" it because of your status. And yes, you're right, re-watching the episode made me realize that Jim as to blame, as Steve could do nothing. This is the way matters should be discussed, thank-you.Gbjerkec (talk) 20:16, February 12, 2017 (UTC) Candidate for deletion I am proposing that this category is deleted. There has been much talk in the past few weeks over various characters being given the category with some fixed views, not least on my own part though I offer no apologies for not wishing to continue to maintain the highest standards on this site (and never will). Back to the subject: in a way this is fascinating - in its pure sense, a murderer is someone who carries out a pre-meditated attack on someone to take their life. Someone who accidentally does so is sometimes said to commit manslaughter. The justice system decides which is which but sometimes long, long debate takes place in the jury room and their conclusions are not accepted by all e.g. the family of the deceased, or even the accused themselves! This site is not the place for such debates and the category attached to this talkpage is perhaps too constrained. We have several choices 1) Extend the category "Murderers and Manslaughterers" (if the latter word even exists), 2) Create a second category for the Manslaughterers, 3) Delete the category. My choice is the third. Even if we extend the definitions, someone will come along out of the blue in years to come who takes a wholly different view to what has been established over several years and we are back to square one. In addition, I don't think defining such people helps the site in any way. It isn't like defining policemen or staff in the corner shop - I've even reversed changes to character profiles in the past (and yes, without debate or consultation - gasp!) where a user has stated that being a murderer is someone's occupation!!! I've always wondered what the pension and holiday entitlements are for that job!;)--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 09:07, February 16, 2017 (UTC) :Agreed, for those reasons. I never liked this category as there's too much wiggle room. We're based on facts, not wild interpretations. David (talk) 11:37, February 16, 2017 (UTC) ::Also in agreement. Karen2310 (talk) 17:33, February 16, 2017 (UTC) :::I've yet to see a character who I find difficult to determine if they are a murderer or not. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:04, February 16, 2017 (UTC) ::::If you decide to keep the category, perhaps the simplest way to administer it is by using it for characters that have actually been convicted of murder in the show? That way, facts remain the main source rather than interpretation? Rollockingbat (talk) 23:51, February 16, 2017 (UTC) :::::That's a good suggestion worthy of consideration! Putting a challenge up though - where would that leave a character like Joe Donelli?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 00:16, February 17, 2017 (UTC) ::::::Haha! Well by my own logic there, as the page notes that "no evidence placed him at the scene of the murder" and that "Joe had gotten away with murder", I'd say that that would leave him exempt. I guess there will always be grey areas but, baring in mind that (certainly with Joe at least) certain cases will be fairly historical (and that the programme in it's current form likes to make things black and white with the characters) and less likely to crop up frequently on here, using the category in this way would make it simpler to determine to other contributors that no conviction = no murderer category. Failing that maybe switching the category name to 'Convicted murderers'? Rollockingbat (talk) 00:51, February 17, 2017 (UTC) ::::::Hjlyio (talk) 01:41, February 17, 2017 (UTC)While I do advocate for a healthy debate now and again, this is getting ridiculous. Some pages are debatable and some are set in stone, so deleting the category altogether sounds like the healthiest course of action. We cannot waste valuable time decide what does and does not qualify, we should be working on the growing to do list. If we want to keep this kind of category, perhaps "Killers"is a more suitable name.Hjlyio (talk) 01:41, February 17, 2017 (UTC) ::::::Hjlyio (talk) 19:32, March 16, 2017 (UTC)Have we still not reached a decision? Almost a month later, and you're still ignoring this.Hjlyio (talk) 19:32, March 16, 2017 (UTC)